All-purpose news and politics thread: Two Steps Beyond!

[CSTowle]

I'm pretty sure that conservatives contribute more to charity than liberals do.

Try again brother.

It depends on if you consider giving money to your church and religious organizations charity. That also helps inflate "volunteering" numbers among conservatives vs liberals. The Catholic Church and the LDS Church tend to be active in helping the poor, but most protestant churches and organizations tend to emphasize the individual and preach prosperity gospel and the like. More likely to judge the poor than to go out of their way to help them. Not all, of course, but more likely than the Catholics or the Mormons (or liberal atheists/heathens of all types).

[Kid A]

I kind of doubt what you are saying is true.

Fake charities for money laundering is a widely known phenomena.

[CSTowle]

I kind of doubt what you are saying is true.

What is next?

I bet you are going to say something about Fox News. And then you will call me a bigot or racist. Isn't that the normal rhetoric????

You'd have to say or do something racist or bigoted for that to come up. Having your facts wrong (or refusing to provide any, and instead just spouting an opinion) will be called out. Fox News probably won't be mentioned, unless it's used as a source for information in which case that will be called out as they have a well-earned reputation for being dishonest and unreliable (as all cable news networks with a particular political leaning tend to be). Our normal rhetoric here tends to be "prove it".

If you can, and are willing to go back and forth on the facts, then people here will (for the most part) be civil with you. If they're not there's an ignore feature and Mods who would welcome you bringing bad behavior to their attention. You will probably be outnumbered (this board tends to lean liberal), but if you have the facts on your side then popular opinion shouldn't matter. People can (and regularly do) concede when they have their facts wrong here.

[Mikekerr3]

I'm pretty sure that conservatives contribute more to charity than liberals do.

Try again brother.

Only if you count money given to hate groups is that possible, even then Some evidence would be helpful.

[Darrell D.]

I kind of doubt what you are saying is true.

What is next?

I bet you are going to say something about Fox News. And then you will call me a bigot or racist. Isn't that the normal rhetoric????

You may have missed this post:

http://community.comicbookresources....l=1#post464375

It has a link showing that conservatives do not give more than liberals, and breaks down the different types of charities.

[Darrell D.]

nuff respect to st louis riverfront times

Riverfront Times Seeks Juvenile Records for Officer Darren Wilson

Well, good. It's only fair.

[emac1790]

I kind of doubt what you are saying is true.

What is next?

I bet you are going to say something about Fox News. And then you will call me a bigot or racist. Isn't that the normal rhetoric????

Nah, that's the strawman rhetoric. This can be avoided by actually back up what you say with proof.

Perhaps strawman fallacy and victim playing is easier to do than having actual proof.

[Kasper Cole]

How about we just all agree that when someone magically pops up in this thread making a claim while refusing to post evidence to support it we just ignore that person?

[Mikekerr3]

Well, good. It's only fair.

I think it is shitty when it is done to anyone, no matter which side of the law. It might be relevant in court but not in the press.

[Darrell D.]

I think it is shitty when it is done to anyone, no matter which side of the law. It might be relevant in court but not in the press.

I agree. But, if the media is going to victim shame, **** 'em.

[madfunkymonkey]

Nah, that's the strawman rhetoric. This can be avoided by actually back up what you say with proof.

Perhaps strawman fallacy and victim playing is easier to do than having actual proof.

If I doubt what someone is saying how can I prove it?

[Darrell D.]

Nah, that's the strawman rhetoric. This can be avoided by actually back up what you say with proof.

Perhaps strawman fallacy and victim playing is easier to do than having actual proof.

Someone else has already posting some links disproving his fallacy.

[emac1790]

If I doubt what someone is saying how can I prove it?

What are you talking about? Prove what you're saying. If you can't, don't expect people to take your word for it. If you doubt someone, prove them wrong. Example, Someone says Aquaman came out before Namor, show the dates of their first appearances. From reputable sources.

I don't know why this is so hard to understand.

[emac1790]

Someone else has already posting some links disproving his fallacy.

Yeah, I know. But to tell the truth, this is kind of fun.

[Kasper Cole]

I don't know if this has been posted already or not but here's something else for the "b-b-but not all cops are bad" crowd that wants to downplay incidents of police misconduct:

16 charges against Oklahoma City police officer include rape, burglary

Read more: http://www.koco.com/news/16-charges-...#ixzz3BuuFARGY

Officer Daniel Holtzclaw was arrested last Thursday and remains in isolation at the Oklahoma County Jail. He was arrested on complaints of two counts of first-degree rape, three counts of forcible oral sex, two counts sexual battery and one count of indecent exposure after he allegedly preyed on seven women while on patrol on the city's northeast side. Friday, several more allegations and an eighth victim were added to the list.

According to a probable cause affidavit included in the charging documents, Holtzclaw stopped a woman walking in the area of Northeast 14th and Jordan on April 24. He located a crack pipe in her property. Instead of arresting her he allegedly took her home, forced her to perform oral sex and then raped her, making the statement, “This is better than the county,” referring to the jail.

Full Story